Brown, Collins & Duguid (1989, Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning)
The article talks about how mathematics is different depending on the cultural context in which it is learned, and that the mathematics of a physicist is different from mathematics of a mathematician, even when talking about a specific 'tool' such as derivation. This raises two questions to me:
In a sense, learning mathematics at school gives an implicit academic culture. We certainly make great efforts particularly in the research based textbooks to make the academic culture more engaging and contextual, but will any classroom-learning, by this theory, fall short of true learning since it is situated in a school and not in a 'culture' in which it will be used? (JMG)
Does this seem to relate back to Thorndike's view on transfer, only from a cognitive aproach? (JMG)
The authors make significant use of the notion of indexical words, phrases, representations, etc., in reference to their perspectives linking knowledge, language, and thinking. How might this notion of indexicality help to establish connections between authentic activity and general notions of constructivism? Are there ways in which authentic activity might get in the way of powerful constructive processes? (JLK DOS)
The authors conclude with the goal of moving towards an epistemology of situated cognition. What are the main features of such an epistemology? How do these features compare and contrast with the main components of constructivism (as an epistemology)? (JLK)
The authors' model describing students' progress from embedded activity to generality includes collaboration as a key component. In describing the cognitive apprenticeship and collaborative learning, the authors' discusses how "tasks requires students to understand the many different roles needed for carrying out any cognitive task" (p. 40). What different roles, entailed to authentic activity, to which the authors' referring? (AJ)
Palincsar (1989)
I am unclear on what the author's counter argument is. Is she saying that direct instruction geared towards robust knowledge is equally capable of producing the type of desired learning, and that the perceived need for cognitive apprenticeship is born out of underestimating the ingenuity of the student? (JMG JLK)
Anderson, Reder, Simon (1996)
The authors set out to critique four central claims of situated learning, in order to demonstrate limitations to the theory. What seems to be the magnitude of their critique of situated learning (i.e. situated learning should be cast aside, situated learning is mostly okay with minor issues, or situated learning is partially appropriate with some major issues)? (JLK)
My main question for this article was: "What is the difference between abstract instruction and generalized apprenticeship?" and how the two different approaches treated development of student thinking. This question was articulated and addressed in Greeno. (AJ)
What are the different ways in which transfer can be measured in research? Specifically, Anderson et al. articulate that a need in their perspective, is "training on the cues that signal the relevance of an available skill should probably receive more emphasis in instruction than it now typically receives" (p. 8). What do they mean by cues? (AJ)
Greeno (1997)
What is Greeno's main distinction between the cognitive and situated perspectives? (JLK DOS)
How is the debate concerning cognitive and situated perspectives different from the discussions regarding radical and social constructivism? Why are there these two conversations, instead of one? (JLK DOS)
Anderson, Reder, Simon (1997 Rejoinder)
Brown, Collins, Duguid (1989 Rejoinder)
The authors say on the end of page 11 through the beginning of page 12 that "we do not see our views...as being in conflict with direct teaching, but with conventional didactic methods, such as lecturing and recitation." What would direct instruction from a cognitive apprenticeship standpoint look like, then? (JMG)
The authors comment on how we could "allow students to see teachers genuinely engaged in and reflecting upon authentic exploration of the subject matter" (promoting the notion of apprenticeship). What does this imply for classroom instruction and teacher and student roles? How might such practices promote or hinder student mental constructions? (JLK)
Across the articles:
What are the different ways in which the term "knowledge" is being used? (AJ)
What is Greeno's main distinction between the cognitive and situated perspectives? (JLK)
How is the debate concerning cognitive and situated perspectives different from the discussions regarding radical and social constructivism? Why are there these two conversations, instead of one? (JLK) Is the debate here more than semantics? (DOS)
Anderson, Reder, Simon (1997 Rejoinder)
The authors claim that a sizable portion of Greeno's argument is really just semantics. What are their key points to support their claim, and do these points seem to make a strong enough response? (JLK DOS).
Across the articles:
What are the different ways in which the term "knowledge" is being used? (AJ)
How would we write a definition of learning after this week's discussion? (DOS)
Where do the main thinkers encountered in this class so far fit on a continuum that relate the role of the individual and the role of social elements (DOS)
Situated Learning/Cognition
Cognitive Psychology
Epistemology
• Knowledge is like language (product of social negotiation)
• Fallible
• Matching to external reality
• Absolute
General Focus
• Position with regard to circumstances in the world of social affairs(Position as physical location)
• Distinction between authentic (ordinary practices of the culture) and school activity
• Emphasis on participation of practice and identity (not in social constructivism)
• Convey from one physical location to another (Position as physical location)
• Knowledge acquisition (pieces of knowledge:skills/facts/procedures)
Methods (unit of analysis)
• Individual cognition situated within culture
• Participation and growth of identity (practices such as initiative, responsibility)
• Individual cognition
• Trajectory of skills and knowledge
Views of Theory vs Practice
• Teachers' roles helping students experience cultural practices (e.g., student-generated multiple strategies, ill-defined or emergent problem solving, refining and formulating questions) beyond that of school activity
• Prescriptive. Set of abstract skills with concrete examples of well-defined problems. Apply theory so that you have "smooth" practice.
Transfer
• Activity should be analyzed at the level of interactive systems
• Generality of patterns and participation across contexts; what is commensurable of certain forms of participation
• Discrete skills that can be applied from one context to another
• Research emphasis on transfer - is it there?
Palincsar (1989)
Anderson, Reder, Simon (1996)
- The authors set out to critique four central claims of situated learning, in order to demonstrate limitations to the theory. What seems to be the magnitude of their critique of situated learning (i.e. situated learning should be cast aside, situated learning is mostly okay with minor issues, or situated learning is partially appropriate with some major issues)? (JLK)
- My main question for this article was: "What is the difference between abstract instruction and generalized apprenticeship?" and how the two different approaches treated development of student thinking. This question was articulated and addressed in Greeno. (AJ)
- What are the different ways in which transfer can be measured in research? Specifically, Anderson et al. articulate that a need in their perspective, is "training on the cues that signal the relevance of an available skill should probably receive more emphasis in instruction than it now typically receives" (p. 8). What do they mean by cues? (AJ)
Greeno (1997)Anderson, Reder, Simon (1997 Rejoinder)
Brown, Collins, Duguid (1989 Rejoinder)
Across the articles:
Anderson, Reder, Simon (1997 Rejoinder)
- The authors claim that a sizable portion of Greeno's argument is really just semantics. What are their key points to support their claim, and do these points seem to make a strong enough response? (JLK DOS).
Across the articles:• Fallible
• Absolute
• Distinction between authentic (ordinary practices of the culture) and school activity
• Emphasis on participation of practice and identity (not in social constructivism)
• Knowledge acquisition (pieces of knowledge:skills/facts/procedures)
• Participation and growth of identity (practices such as initiative, responsibility)
• Trajectory of skills and knowledge
• Generality of patterns and participation across contexts; what is commensurable of certain forms of participation
• Research emphasis on transfer - is it there?